Re: [Haskell-cafe] [ANNOUNCE] GHC 9.8.1-alpha4 is now available

George can you share the generated settings file? On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 8:34 PM Ben Gamari wrote: > George Colpitts writes: > > > It seems unlikely that the current tests wouldn't find this bug. Is it > the > > case that the tests are never run on aarch64-darwin Macs? > > > The tests are

Re: [Haskell-cafe] [ANNOUNCE] GHC 9.4.6 is now available

you like to 9.4.6 instead of .7 ... On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 11:58 AM Ben Gamari wrote: > > The GHC developers are happy to announce the availability of GHC 9.4.6. > Binary > distributions, source distributions, and documentation are available at > > https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/9.4.6 >

Re: success on a slightly modified version of your suggestion for 21506

that matches my experience, namely that i've successfully installed ghc 9.2.2 on osx 12.4 aka monterey a few times On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 12:59 PM George Colpitts wrote: > Hi Ben > > Thanks for the quick responses particularly on the weekend before your > vacation. > > you wrote: > > What

Re: osx conundrum

The issue would be macports. It uses its own version of the iconv lib and that always gets headaches if the ghc touches anything else. if you’re using macports you have to make sure everything is Mac ports only for ghc linking. Else you have to make sure you don’t touch any macports c Libs via

Re: osx conundrum

i would make sure you're using the ghc version you *think* you're using i've never had that problem with a self managed style install (which should be equiv to using ghcup's setup). i'm at 8.10.7 at the moment. whats the output of `which -a ghc` and `which ghc`? mixing several ghc installs of

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Bundle patterns with type aliases

These are great ideas! Could you please create a ghc tracker ticket with a tiny examples or two? There may be specific technical reasons we might not be able to do so for type synonyms in ghc, but I don’t see any obvious barriers in the case of David’s excellent idea, I’ve def seen lots of great

Re: -dinline-check for symbolic names?

I’m not sure about the pragma debugging, but are you using it in point free style? Cause I’m that case it may not be inclined because it’s not being fully applied on the left hand side? On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 11:36 AM Michael Sperber wrote: > > I'm trying to figure out why this function from

Re: How to user-define a type equality constraint?

That sounds like a bug/oversight! Is that not fixed in 9.2? On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 11:08 PM David Feuer wrote: > `Char` is defined in user code. What you really can't define are Char# and > TYPE, and you can't modify `RuntimeRep`. Speaking of `Char#`, I see that in > 9.0, at least, it has kind

Re: Decorating exceptions with backtrace information

On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:32 AM Carter Schonwald wrote: > ben, could you please email the libraries list with this too? This seems > like a core libraries / base change rather than a ghc-the-compiler change > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 6:57 PM Michael Sloan wrote: > >> Than

Re: Decorating exceptions with backtrace information

ben, could you please email the libraries list with this too? This seems like a core libraries / base change rather than a ghc-the-compiler change On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 6:57 PM Michael Sloan wrote: > Thanks so much for making a proposal for this, Ben!! It's great to see > progress here. > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Glasgow Haskell Compiler 8.10.1-rc1 released

Yeah, like how we removed x87 support from code gen except one tiny piece in the abi, so 32bit x86 code gen is always -msse2 flavor so rounding now acts sane :) (A tiny step in a long running make floating point great effort of mine) On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 7:39 AM Brandon Allbery wrote: > > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] GHC 8.8.1 and cabal-install version

V1 or v2 install? On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:42 AM George Colpitts wrote: > https://www.haskell.org/ghc/blog/20190825-ghc-8.8.1-released.html says > > cabal-install users should note that cabal-install-3.0 or later is > required for use with GHC 8.8. > > but this seems wrong or have I done

Re: Helium II

i'm slowly prepping some stuff for ghc and the committee, though i can't say about the general action. I do think some stuff i've got planned should make its way in, i cant speak for other folks etc etc On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:54 AM Anthony Clayden < anthony_clay...@clear.net.nz> wrote: > On

Re: Report merged, steps to follow

sounds good to me, we can always tweak stuff as needed On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 10:04 AM Mario Blažević wrote: > Four weeks having passed since the previous discussion with no > objections, I have now merged the content of the Haskell Report > > from https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] GHC 8.4.4 released

Hey David, i'm looking at the git history andit doesn't seem to have any commits between 8.4.3 and 8.4.4 related to the dataToTag issue does any haskell code in the while trigger the bug on 8.4 series? On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 11:06 AM David Feuer wrote: > Did this release fix the dataToTag#

Re: A question about run-time errors when class members are undefined

th a new > ambiguity rule, depending on the context (or type) where (f x) is used. > > Kind regards, > > Carlos > > Em 2018-10-10 12:52, Carter Schonwald escreveu: > > Carlos, local scoping for type classes is flat out not gonna happen in > > the hask

Re: A question about run-time errors when class members are undefined

Carlos, local scoping for type classes is flat out not gonna happen in the haskell language standard any time soon. if you want to make a case for it, demonstrate its utility, this mailing list isn't for that. Especially for something that fundamentally changes the programming model of the

Re: Quo vadis?

agreed... i think theres still room for the current for the current committee to succeed (though depending on ambitions it should maybe slide into being 2022 standard perhaps?) I cant speak for other members, but i'm still hopeful about putting together some of the language improvements to the

Re: Testing that packages still compile

It may be that there’s quite a bit of code that doesn’t have explicit top level type signatures? That’s legal in Haskell but considered bad style / bad practice for packages. I’m not sure if the norms in O’Caml reflect the same inclination. This may complicate localizing type errors On Thu, May

Re: Scoped Type Variables discussion forum [was: open up the issues tracker on ghc-proposals]

I mean for the fixed / new one I’m proposing :) On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 8:21 PM Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > No. I’m saying make same variables get the parent quantified, even if it’s > implicit. > > Breaking changes are ok if they make things bet

Re: Scoped Type Variables discussion forum [was: open up the issues tracker on ghc-proposals]

in an industrial context are a ok with none silent breaking changes. This would be very easy to catch :) On the pedagogy side it actually makes learning simpler afaict :) On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 8:03 PM Anthony Clayden < anthony_clay...@clear.net.nz> wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2018 at 11:23 A

Re: Scoped Type Variables discussion forum [was: open up the issues tracker on ghc-proposals]

indeed .. and we can reasonably say "lets deal with the bandaid in one go by cleaning it up in the next standard" so what would the next gen look like? eg: fresh variables get the usual implicit forall at the front of the type, and everything else either needs an explicit quantifier OR it

Re: PSA for Cabal 2.2 new-* users regarding .ghc.environment files

Seems like that’d be a worthwhile cleanup / fix up release so this can be more visible / less silent. :) On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 6:11 PM Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 10:41 PM, Gershom B wrote: > > In particular, there is not

Scoped type variables Re: Open up the issues tracker on ghc-proposals

Please do this! I don’t care what forums or list or whatever. As long as it’s collated and such It could even be on the prime issue tracker for prime proposals. Just that it’s written down :) On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 7:17 PM Anthony Clayden wrote: > On Th, 3 May

Re: [Haskell-cafe] PSA: `cabal update` command needs manual unsticking

My cabal v2 seemed to be using 00 indices. Much to my confusion. Maybe I should reinstall it and check my config ;) On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:25 PM Brandon Allbery wrote: > Correct: cabal-install 1.x still uses the old index format (00-index). The > logic is different for

Re: [was ghc-devs] Reasoning backwards with type families

This was / perhaps still is one goal of injective type families too! I’m not sure why the current status is, but it’s defjnitely related On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 3:44 AM Anthony Clayden < anthony_clay...@clear.net.nz> wrote: > > On Thu Nov 16 01:31:55 UTC 2017, David Feuer wrote: > > (Moving to

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

agreed On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:37 AM, John Wiegley wrote: > > "DS" == Doaitse Swierstra writes: > > SD> The good thing about laTeX is that out of all the candidates it is the > SD> most likely one to still work 40 years from now, > > +1 from

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

I personally kinda enjoy latex. Granted that's assuming it's well written :) On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > Hello *, > > On 2017-09-08 at 00:46:52 +0200, Mario Blazevic wrote: > > [...] > > >> If the report was written in reStructuredText we

Re: Remove eq and show from num class

I mostly wanted to confirm that we in fact will actually say yes before doing the formal writtingup :) On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:06 PM, John Wiegley wrote: > > "AC" == Anthony Clayden writes: > > AC> All yays from committee members please

Re: Remove eq and show from num class

well sure, i'm happy to write the 3 line diff, but because of the sheer unambiguity of this i'd rather get the votes on email before botthering to write the diff, at which point the main question is whether i wrote the diff correctly please say yes or no. its quite easy with email . i'm not

Remove eq and show from num class

All yays from committee members please reply with yes to this email :) -Carter ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Haskell Prime Meeting at ICFP (Was: Whose gonna be at icfp?)

There's food sans line near c5 On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM Henrik Nilsson < henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > Reminder: Haskell' is meeting lunchtime today, so shortly after 12:30. > > We now, thank to Jeremy Gibbons, also have a room: C5. > > So grab lunch and then go to

Re: Whose gonna be at icfp?

Missing Conall's talk seems like a terrible time to meet :( On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:54 AM Henrik Nilsson < henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/05/2017 10:27 AM, Mario Blazevic wrote: > > I thought John said 4:40 today. You missed Andres Löh. > > Must have missed that.

Re: Whose gonna be at icfp?

Either way, see y'all in oxford On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 6:30 PM Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Agreed. Hence let's just have something less structured than the GitHub > flow ... just any doc will do. Also it'd be simpler to have just one tool > for coms.

Re: Whose gonna be at icfp?

Agreed. Hence let's just have something less structured than the GitHub flow ... just any doc will do. Also it'd be simpler to have just one tool for coms. On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 12:55 PM Mario Blažević <blama...@ciktel.net> wrote: > On 2017-08-25 06:48 PM, Carter Schonwald wrote:

Re: Default module header `module Main where`

as a guideline what you say is true, and at least in this case as the motivation is user focused it should be validated thusly :) On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mario Blažević wrote: > On 2017-05-16 10:18 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> a very small proposal to

Re: ConstraintKinds seems to be automatically enabled

woops, i mispoke, its probably that bug brandon spoke of or somesuch, didn't look closely enough at the previous email :) On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Carter Schonwald < carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > in newer versions of ghc, client code of a module that uses constraint >

Re: ConstraintKinds seems to be automatically enabled

in newer versions of ghc, client code of a module that uses constraint kinds gets constraint kinds enabled. this is to make it pleasant to use constraint kinds in libraries. this is deliberate feature :) On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote: > On Thu, May

Re: Multiple imports on a single line

likewise, why not use semicolon? per se we already can do mulitple lines on a single line via semicolon :) On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Francesco Ariis wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:18:13PM +0200, Vassil Ognyanov Keremidchiev > wrote: > > Hello! > > > > What do you

Re: Floating Point Exceptions

Adding sigfpe handling doesn't have a writeupnyet because it's on my holiday project queue and the specifics of doing it nicely depend somewhat on the target architecture. If you want to get good errors in the mean time, register a sigfpe signal handler at the top level and invoke a smidge of c

Re: Step-by-step guide for creating a new proposal

I'll have some down time at the airport this afternoon and see about dealing with this On Friday, October 7, 2016, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds good to me unless anyone objects or has an alternative? > > On Friday, October 7, 2016, Takenobu

Re: Step-by-step guide for creating a new proposal

mittee. > + If you want to create entirely new issue, privately talk with member of > the > + committee or ask on haskell-prime mailing list. > > I think that non-member will understand pre-process :) > > Regards, > Takenobu > > > 2016-10-06 23:38 GMT+09:00

Re: Step-by-step guide for creating a new proposal

committee members] > * PR by a committee member > > (3) open discussion on github [everyone] > * conservation on the PR > > For me, (1) is now clear. > If it's written somewhere, it's easy for non-committee members to > understand the total proposal process:) > > &g

Re: Step-by-step guide for creating a new proposal

I guess the question is what is the definition of issue in that context? Whatever the specifics, I think if you either a) privately talk with a memeber of the committee about what you intend to do and they are willing to "co own" / "sponsor it", and this is indicated in the pr summary or the

Re: Meet up at ICFP?

yeah, i couldn't make it too :( On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Mario Blažević wrote: > On 2016-09-14 02:17 PM, José Manuel Calderón Trilla wrote: > >> Richard has also volunteered to act as secretary for the meeting so >> that the minutes of the meeting can be posted.

Re: Proposal process status

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016, Ben Gamari wrote: > Yuras Shumovich > writes: > > > Looks like reddit is a wrong place, so I'm replicating my comment here: > > > Thanks for your comments Yuras! > > >> * Do you feel the proposed process is

Re: Proposal: ArgumentDo

On Saturday, July 9, 2016, Henrik Nilsson wrote: > Hi all, > > On 07/09/2016 08:09 AM, C Maeder wrote: > >> The asymmetry that you mention is already apparent for (Haskell98) infix >> expressions, i.e. when "composing" lambda- or if-expression: >> >> (if c then

Re: Proposal: ArgumentDo

Can you walk me through how this simplifies the grammar etc in concrete compare contrast or what the diffs between the grammar and associated engineering would be? I don't see how it simplifies the grammar, but I could be a bit obtuse. That aside, I'm also a bit fuzzy on the other claim, that

Re: Proposal: ArgumentDo

rd syntax for exactly that > reason? > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 1:23 PM, David Feuer <david.fe...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What makes >> >> f do{x} do{y} >> >> any harder to read than similar record syntax? >> >> f Foo{foo=3} Foo{foo=4} >

Re: Proposal: ArgumentDo

agreed -1, ambiguity is bad for humans, not just parsers. perhaps most damningly, > f do{ x } do { y } is just reallly really weird/confusing to me, and as the proposal itself says at the end as the cons: - It's harder to read than the alternative. >- Creating a language extension

CMM-to-ASM: Register allocation wierdness

Agreed. There's also some other mismatches between ghc and llvm in a few fun / interesting ways! There's a lot of room for improvement in both code gens, but there's also a lot of room to improve the ease of experimenting with improvements. Eg we don't have a peephole pass per target, so those

Re: CMM-to-ASM: Register allocation wierdness

This email would have been marked spam had I not unmarked all your emails as spam. Also a gmail user :/ On Saturday, June 18, 2016, Simon Peyton Jones wrote: > Takenobu, and others > > Thanks. Several people have mentioned that email from me is ending up in > spam. > >

Re: Feedback on -Wredundant-constraints

Either way, do we have a strong agreement that for ghc 8.2 that this warning should be split up and the noiser part should be moved out of the default wall set? On Monday, June 6, 2016, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > To better elaborate : I defini

Re: Feedback on -Wredundant-constraints

To better elaborate : I definitely want this for the next major version i.e. 8.2.* , but I'm also wondering if perhaps the "overly constrained type" warning should be flat out removed from Wall even in ghc 8.0.2, On Monday, June 6, 2016, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gma

Re: Feedback on -Wredundant-constraints

It's a tall ask, but why not? On Jun 6, 2016 12:16 PM, "Eric Seidel" <e...@seidel.io> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016, at 07:37, Carter Schonwald wrote: > > I don't suppose there's any hope of having this resolved prior to GHC 8.2 > > because it is a real usa

Re: Feedback on -Wredundant-constraints

d to figure this one out. > > * We really need a way of disabling/enabling warnings per declaration. I > propose something like this: > > > {-# WARNINGS foo -Wno-type-overly-specific #-} > > foo :: Int -> Int > > foo x = x > > Richard > > On Jun 4, 2016

Re: Feedback on -Wredundant-constraints

Agreed. Ive hit exactly these issues myself to the point where i err on suppressing that warning in my code now. In part because i use those unused constraints as a semantic contract. On Friday, June 3, 2016, Adam Foltzer wrote: > With 8.0.1 freshly arrived, I'm taking on

Re: Scope of committee (can we do *new* things?)

On Friday, May 13, 2016, Richard Eisenberg wrote: > I strongly agree with all the points Andres makes here: > - Focus on existing extensions > - Permit discussion and even modification of existing behavior > - Allow possibility of discussing new behavior > - Strive hard

Re: The GADT debate

On Sunday, May 8, 2016, Richard Eisenberg wrote: > > On May 7, 2016, at 11:05 PM, Gershom B > > wrote: > > > > an attempt (orthogonal to the prime committee at first) to specify an > algorithm for inference that is easier to describe and

Re: The GADT debate

On Saturday, May 7, 2016, Gershom B wrote: > On May 7, 2016 at 10:30:05 PM, wren romano (w...@community.haskell.org > ) wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > There's been some discussion about whether to consider including GADTs > > in the new report, but it's been mixed

Re: Limber separators

On Saturday, May 7, 2016, wren romano wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Cale Gibbard > wrote: > > I can't really be the only one here who thinks that this kind of > > discussion of extensions to the syntax of Haskell is

Re: Infrastructure & Communication

Yes, persistent commenting / threading somehow on some tool. And I trust Herbert's judgement On Saturday, May 7, 2016, Vitaly Bragilevsky wrote: > The third one here. I think that process decisions can be made by chairman > alone without calling votes, that's organizing

Re: Limber separators

On Saturday, May 7, 2016, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I worry that this thread is turning into a bit of bike shed before we have > a good sense of what construction tools we have on hand! > > One side consideration we might want to keep in m

Re: Limber separators

I worry that this thread is turning into a bit of bike shed before we have a good sense of what construction tools we have on hand! One side consideration we might want to keep in mind is what spaces of parser tech can work off the shelf in various juxtapositions of code and features. The more

Re: RFC: Removing the `-hb` profiling option

What about disallowing -hb on threaded builds? That does just sort of punt it a little bit, it a not quite satisfactory way perhaps On Friday, May 6, 2016, Evan Laforge wrote: > I've used this a lot when looking for leaks. Especially combined with > other things like -hbdrag

Re: Looking for GHC compile-time performance tests

It also helped that the test suite got added back to the main cabal. And the test suite took a WHILE, due to some sort of coercion seize blowup that I think was fixed in 8,0. But yes. Definitely vector build times decayed. Partly due to the shift to the general bundle rep, and partly due to ...

Re: Are there GHC extensions we'd like to incorporate wholesale?

Well said, having coherent location to collect bits per topic so they don't get lost to mailing list thread mists of time is pretty important. I don't care too much as long as it's easy to comment on a topic / ticket and or propose edits. But probably something we should front load doing. On

Re: Evaluation order control between two expressions

On Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 10:16 AM Takenobu Tani wrote: > Hi Prime, > > This is additional information to organize my brain. > > This issue also occurs in single thread. > Especially, when they have side effects. > >seq exp1 exp2 > > Because compiler can always re-order

Re: Chairship / responsibility

On Saturday, April 30, 2016, Henrik Nilsson wrote: > Hi all, > > > It was my understanding that Herbert would be the chair when I asked > > to be on the committee, and the fact that this question was already > > answer was a factor in my decision to try to help.

Re: Infrastructure & Communication

Or a phabricator instance ? That might also make sense. On Friday, April 29, 2016, Francesco Ariis wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:56:51PM +0200, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > > One benefit I see from using GitHub is that this way would we be closer > > to the Haskell

Re: suppress warning "Defined but not used: type variable ‘x’" in GHC-8.0

Have you tried _x instead? On Saturday, January 9, 2016, Henning Thielemann < lemm...@henning-thielemann.de> wrote: > > GHC-8.0 emits several new warnings of this kind: > >Defined but not used: type variable ‘x’ > > for declarations like > >type instance Snd x y = y > > Enthusiastically,

Re: Breaking Changes and Long Term Support Haskell

Well said! I do have a small worry that the longer roll out window will be harder to manage given that every thing is done by (outstanding) volunteers. But maybe the answer there is that ghc should do major version releases more frequently :), eg every 9 months instead of every 12!  On

Re: cannot build 'vector' with profiling

, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: why were you trying to build profiling dylibs? i thought we only support static linked profiling libs? (i could be wrong though) On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Ranjit Jhala jh...@cs.ucsd.edu wrote: ah, my bad I

Re: cannot build 'vector' with profiling

I just always set profiling to True in ~/.cabal/config and then call it a day :) I believe cabal or something has a notion of profiling ghc options that are only supplied when building profiling libs, but I don't remember precisely where they are or if they are a thing On Thursday, June 11,

Re: cannot build 'vector' with profiling

Remove the prof flag and it will work. GHC is trying to do dylib with profiling On Jun 11, 2015 11:12 AM, Ranjit Jhala jh...@cs.ucsd.edu wrote: Hi Carter, OK, here's the full info (see log below), this is on an MBP, running ghc 7.8.3 (From ghcformac). In a new directory, I create a FRESH

Re: cannot build 'vector' with profiling

What ghc version and how was it built? On Wednesday, June 10, 2015, Ranjit Jhala jh...@cs.ucsd.edu wrote: Hi all, I cannot build 'vector' (or 'cmdargs') with profiling on. specifically when I run: $ cabal install --enable-executable-profiling --enable-library-profiling

Re: cannot build 'vector' with profiling

://ghcformacosx.github.io ... Should I just move to 7.10? On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: What ghc version and how was it built? On Wednesday, June 10, 2015, Ranjit Jhala jh...@cs.ucsd.edu wrote: Hi all, I cannot build 'vector

Re: ghc 7.10.1 hard lock on exit with shake, OS X 10.10

could you share a minimal program that reproduces the problem? On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com wrote: After I upgraded to 7.10.1 I started noticing that my shakefile would lock up on exit. It's after the 'main' function exits, and none of the shake tests have a

Re: RFC: Native -XCPP Proposal

, May 8, 2015, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed. This is also how we use gcc and the llvm tooling. If we want the cpp tooling to be available as a library, that's a whole nother set of needs. Gmp lgpl I can brush under the rug at work because there's the various

Re: RFC: Native -XCPP Proposal

Indeed. This is also how we use gcc and the llvm tooling. If we want the cpp tooling to be available as a library, that's a whole nother set of needs. Gmp lgpl I can brush under the rug at work because there's the various integer simple options, this gets a bit more squirrelly otherwise. Maybe

Re: SIMD

indeed, dont use it. the current design is only -fllvm, and the choice in api is exactly the wrong one for those who actually want to use SIMD correctly If you want to use Simd today, write C code and ffi call it! https://github.com/wellposed/vector-vectorized is an example effort I did nearly 2

Re: Binary bloat in 7.10

Great sleuthing!! Thanks for pinning down whats going on! On Apr 2, 2015 8:48 PM, Thomas Miedema thomasmied...@gmail.com wrote: Jeremy, On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Thomas Miedema thomasmied...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe `split-objs` is not applied? That suggestion was completely

Re: Binary bloat in 7.10

Do you have profiling enabled locally? On Apr 2, 2015 5:19 AM, Jeremy volderm...@hotmail.com wrote: Very strange. If I download Cabal from hackage and build it with 'cabal build' the bloat disappears. cabal build: 18M HSCabal-1.22.2.0-HWT8QvVfJLn2ubvobpycJY.o 21M

Re: Binary bloat in 7.10

Woops, never mind. On Apr 2, 2015 7:53 AM, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have profiling enabled locally? On Apr 2, 2015 5:19 AM, Jeremy volderm...@hotmail.com wrote: Very strange. If I download Cabal from hackage and build it with 'cabal build' the bloat

Re: Binary bloat in 7.10

How much of this might be attributable to longer linker symbol names? Ghc 7.10 object code does have larger symbols! Is there a way to easily tabulate that? On Apr 1, 2015 9:40 AM, Jeremy volderm...@hotmail.com wrote: Roman Cheplyaka-2 wrote I'm not denying (or confirming) your claim, but it

Re: Binary bloat in 7.10

didn't think it was too bad. Maybe we were wrong! Edward Excerpts from Jeremy's message of 2015-04-01 07:26:55 -0700: Carter Schonwald wrote How much of this might be attributable to longer linker symbol names? Ghc 7.10 object code does have larger symbols! Is there a way to easily

Re: [Haskell-cafe] PowerPC variants (GHC 7.8.3)

Hey Jon, I do know that some of the GHC dev team is probably best equipped to answer your question, i'm cc'ing the ghc dev and users lists so they can jump in and help! -Carter On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Jon Schneider hask...@jschneider.net wrote: Good morning, We have a product with an

Re: Proposal: ValidateMonoLiterals - Initial bikeshed discussion

Its worth pointing out that when / if luites out of process TH design happens for ghc, TH will be usable in cross compile builds of ghc as well. So we shouldn't let that constraint we have for now dictate future tooling ideas. On Feb 6, 2015 3:50 PM, Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com wrote: Would

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.10.1 Release Candidate 2

George, what version of llvm are you using? afaik, only llvm 3.5 is supported for 7.10 (though I could be wrong) On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 8:39 PM, George Colpitts george.colpi...@gmail.com wrote: Has anybody successfully build and used this on the Mac on 10.10 using the latest XCode? While it

Re: Thread behavior in 7.8.3

woops, forgot to attach the relevant links, (i shouldn't email late at night :) ) https://github.com/basvandijk/usb/issues/7 is the lib usb matter https://phabricator.haskell.org/D347 point being: on ghc 7.8, certain hanging behavior from libusb (at least as of a few months ago) was due to one

Re: Thread behavior in 7.8.3

i think ben gamari hit similar/related issues with the lib usb bindings in 7.8, and i believe some / all of them are fixed in 7.10 (i could be mixing things up though) On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Michael Jones m...@proclivis.com wrote: Simon, The code below hangs on the frameEx

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 7.8.4

basically about it on Reddit, in the announce thread. I'll give it a spin, and if it works I will share the link (if you are ok with that!) on the same Reddit post. Alfredo On Tuesday, 23 December 2014, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: Heres a OS X build that should work

Re: CPP Help (was Re: Latest Template Haskell Breaks Package)

what version of cabal-install are you using? On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org wrote: Ok I have a cut down version of the problem and am cross posting to glasgow-haskell-users. To restate the problem: this is from code that has not been changed for 2

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 7.8.4

Heres a OS X build that should work with = 10.7 http://www.wellposed.com/opensource/ghc/releasebuild-unofficial/ghc-7.8.4-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.bz2 and the sha 512 shasum -a512 ghc-7.8.4-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.bz2

Re: Behavior of touch#

, and then gets erased when doing final code gen. Its meant to ensure on heap pointers remain reachable On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Carter Schonwald carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: the point of touch is to prevent premature GC, it actually gets erased at the CMM level i believe

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.8.4 Release Candidate 1

Thomas and I have found some bugs in HPC on OSX, and we're in the midst of tracking those down, Those fixes should get into 7.8.4 and 7.10 both. Currently HPC on OSX is broken in pretty fundamental ways, and thats not ok! -Carter On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:53 PM, George Colpitts

Re: New implementation draft for -XStaticPointers

Hey Facundo... the merge window for 7.10 closed a few days ago. (i myself have some work thats missed that merge window too) that said, great work and I look forward to helping with the code review. -Carter On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 4:22 PM, John Wiegley jo...@newartisans.com wrote: Facundo

Re: Defining a custom newByteArray primop that uses calloc?

you cant provide 1 word alignment guarantees if the bytearray isnt pinned, ... at least with the current RTS setup. (though that would be pretty handy if possible) On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote: Brandon Simmons wrote: In my tests, using

Re: GHC 7.8.3 thread hang

what OS are you on? what build options did you use? On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:11 AM, Michael Jones m...@proclivis.com wrote: I am trying to debug a lockup problem (and need help with debugging technique), where hang means a thread stops at a known place during evaluation, and other threads

Re: Recursion on TypeNats

you want the following (which doesnt require undediable instances) data Nat = Z | S Nat type family U (x :: Nat) where U 0 = Z U n = S (U (n-1)) this lets you convert type lits into your own peanos or whatever hat tip to richard eisenburg for showing me this trick on the mailing list a

  1   2   3   4   >